Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 9th Jul 2009 12:09 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y During the Gran Canaria Desktop Summit, Richard M. Stallman of the Free Software Foundation (and the Superfluous Introduction Award goes to...) gave a keynote speech. Said keynote speech raised a few eyebrows in the Free software community because of a number of questionable remarks regarding women in technology. David "Lefty" Schlesinger, member of the GNOME Advisory Board and active in the mobile open source community, took issue with RMS' remarks and decided to call him out on it. The response he got was... Less than satisfying.
Thread beginning with comment 372596
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
SReilly
Member since:
2006-12-28

Excuse me but the onus is on YOU to prove that the primary motivation of the person making the remark is of an offensive nature.

Not when s/he is a public speaker.

It is up to you to prove whether the source of the joke was meant to be hurtful - unless you can some how prove that it was his motivation, quite frankly, what it appears is a very bitter person trying to destroy what little fun there is left in the work place.

Again, see above. Also, WTF does public speaking have to do with the workplace?

...one has to remember that before you cry wolf that you find out what was the motivator behind it.

If a public speaker's statements offend me, for whatever reason, but are of an ambiguous nature, i.e. could be interpreted in a different way, then yes, I would await a reply before I cried wolf. On the other hand, the statements made by RMS leave very little to the imagination and frankly, to "jump" to the conclusion that he is being sexist is not an unreasonable conclusion. That is the bane of public speaking. RMS has stated that he did not mean his comments to be sexist, which is a great thing to hear, but my and other people's issue with this statement is RMS's inability to say sorry without making himself out to be some kind of victim.

What proof do you have? all you have is that there are less females than males and thus you jump to the conclusion that it means there is discrimination. You've provided no evidence to prove your conclusion - I assume you're another one of those people who believe that you can be anything you want with enough study.

Don't be a fool. This popped up after the first search for computer science gender stereotype: http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2009/06/08/gender_gap_in_...

If you want to argue, I suggest you read up on what you are arguing about. Arguing for arguments sake just make you look like an idiot.

Some people have a natural inclination towards a certain field, others don't - and shock horror, males and females are different, just as individuals, we are all different. If it makes me sexist because god forbid I recognise the difference between the sexes than grade me 'sexist pig number one' of which you seem to be more than happy to do.

I too realize there are differences between the sexes, of that there is no doubt but that does not negate the social and gender stereotypes I was talking about. Plus, I never either called or implied you where a sexist so either stop putting words in my mouth or go rant somewhere else. Frankly, those kind of tactics are retarded and if you can't have a decent argument without resorting to BS like the above, you need to keep that chip on your shoulder in check.

I don't know about you - but I tend not to lock myself in my office all day; I have to work with colleagues, small talk arises, people talking about their weekends, what they did with their partner or family; so yes, it does come out eventually. Some of us are more obvious than others, so it is as 'obvious' as being a female.

No it's not. I can't tell if someone is gay by just looking at them. I can if they are female.

I never complained about colleagues talking about it - just demonstrating that there are things one doesn't like being talked about but we're adults, we can tune our brains out if one isn't interested.


And I pointed out that being alienated is not the same as tuning out. Frankly, I'm apolled by your hostile tone and your juvenile tactics. Now I know why people automatically vote your comments down. If you can't see it, you need to get your head out of your a**.

Reply Parent Score: 3

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Again, see above. Also, WTF does public speaking have to do with the workplace?


I see no difference between a public speaker trying to throw some humour into the speech any differently than a male or female attempting to lighten the mood in the workplace with some humour. Guess what, not all peoples humour is the same - what might be a great laugh for one person could be greatly offensive to another and vice versa. Like I said, we're all adults here and as long as the joke isn't an direct attack on a person or a given group of people which as malicious intent - let the water roll off your back.

If a public speaker's statements offend me, for whatever reason, but are of an ambiguous nature, i.e. could be interpreted in a different way, then yes, I would await a reply before I cried wolf. On the other hand, the statements made by RMS leave very little to the imagination and frankly, to "jump" to the conclusion that he is being sexist is not an unreasonable conclusion. That is the bane of public speaking. RMS has stated that he did not mean his comments to be sexist, which is a great thing to hear, but my and other people's issue with this statement is RMS's inability to say sorry without making himself out to be some kind of victim.


Do you know anything about RMS? I'm certainly not a person who defends RMS on a regular basis but at the same time do you have any evidence to show that malicious intent was the underlying motivator? do you even understand the context in which it was said? how many of these females you speak of (since you've nominated yourself as the spokes person) were offended and of which percentage was the first time they've ever seen or spoken to RMS? Have you talked to RMS long standing female friends who know him on a one to one basis and asked them for their take on what he said?

Don't be a fool. This popped up after the first search for computer science gender stereotype: http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2009/06/08/gender_gap_in_...


And the link proves nothing - where is your evidence that females are being stopped from entering the computer field? you've made a bold statement and when I look at the evidence all I see is a fizzle. Want to know the most common remark I hear from females about computers, "oh, its far too nerdy", "oh, only geeks do that", "Oh, only ugly girls do that" etc. How is it the fault of males if females talk themselves out of a career in a given occupation?

I ask again, using your same arguments, should we say there is rampant descrimination in nursing and teaching against males due to the low number who are entering the profession?

If you want to argue, I suggest you read up on what you are arguing about. Arguing for arguments sake just make you look like an idiot.


And calling someone an idiot without establishing an argument makes you look like an even bigger fool.

I too realize there are differences between the sexes, of that there is no doubt but that does not negate the social and gender stereotypes I was talking about. Plus, I never either called or implied you where a sexist so either stop putting words in my mouth or go rant somewhere else. Frankly, those kind of tactics are retarded and if you can't have a decent argument without resorting to BS like the above, you need to keep that chip on your shoulder in check.


And yes what, Simon Baron-Cohen (Baron-Cohen, S (2003) The essential difference: men, women and the extreme male brain. Penguin/Basic Books) demonstrated that gender stereotypes exist be in it a partially formed state even in the very early stages of a child development.

What you sound like is a Radical Materialist Constructionist who has this fixation in your head that everything is setup to screw over females, that the system is 'rigged' for the patriarchy on the basis that it does not conform to some sort of androgynous societal construct.

And I pointed out that being alienated is not the same as tuning out. Frankly, I'm apolled by your hostile tone and your juvenile tactics. Now I know why people automatically vote your comments down. If you can't see it, you need to get your head out of your a**.


Nice to see that rudeness has no bounds on this site - especially when debating with pimply faced 15 year olds.

Edited 2009-07-10 00:36 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

SReilly Member since:
2006-12-28

You have taken just about everything I have pointed out, failed to understand what I was talking about and then went ahead and either propped up my point, contradicted yourself of labelled me as some kind of raving anti-sexist with absolutely no evidence what so ever.

You truly are an idiot.

Reply Parent Score: 2